|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 38
Location: Dallas Texas
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and [#permalink]
 07 Jun 2004, 05:04
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
100% (01:42) wrong based on 0 sessions
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.
The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.
Please explain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 428
Location: India
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
My choice (A).
Rest of the statements cannot be infered from the passage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4441
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
81
[0], given: 0
|
agree with A here
_________________
Best Regards,
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 02 Jun 2004
Posts: 194
Location: Kiev, Ukraine
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-subjective-objective [#permalink]
07 Jun 2004, 07:53
sjunagha wrote: We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.
The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.
Please explain
I think that the answer is B. A almost makes it, but to me, it seems misleading.
The main discussion in the passage is about subjectivity vs. objectivity of aesthetic judgements. The argument is that contemporaty judgements are subjective, while historical can be called objective. References to Michaelangelo, Back and Shakespeare are only examples in the support of the argument.
Therefore, I think that the statements in the passage give best support to statement B. The work of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 772
Location: Milwaukee
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-subjective-objective [#permalink]
07 Jun 2004, 10:24
sjunagha wrote: We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.
The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.
Please explain
it has to be B, A is too narrow. B gives you broader perspective of what is stated in the passage
_________________
Praveen
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 602
Location: San Jose, CA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-subjective-objective [#permalink]
07 Jun 2004, 11:17
sjunagha wrote: We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.
The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.
Please explain
I will go with A
For B to be correct, shouldn't it be: "The value of contemporary work of art cannot be subjectively measured."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 602
Location: San Jose, CA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-subjective-objective [#permalink]
07 Jun 2004, 11:19
sjunagha wrote: We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.
The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.
Please explain
I will go with A
For B to be correct, shouldn't it be: "The value of contemporary work of art cannot be subjectively measured."
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4441
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
81
[0], given: 0
|
I believe B is an unwarranted inference. What says that there is no measure of objectivity on which Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art cannot be measured? What if that measure of objectivity is, a pure example here, their rarity or longevity?
A on the other hand can be infered. Ask yourself this question:
Why are works of art subjective? Because critics often disagree about their value.
Why was Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art subjective? Because critics disagreed about their value.
_________________
Best Regards,
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 20
Location: Ukraine
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Paul wrote: I believe B is an unwarranted inference. What says that there is no measure of objectivity on which Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art cannot be measured? What if that measure of objectivity is, a pure example here, their rarity or longevity?
A on the other hand can be infered. Ask yourself this question:
Why are works of art subjective? Because critics often disagree about their value.
Why was Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art subjective? Because critics disagreed about their value.
I vote for B.
I eliminated A because "arts of Mich, Bach and Shak have continued to delight audiences for centures". "Continued" here means these works delighted audiences in the past as well. I attributed critics-from-the-past to the intire audience-from-the-past. Moreover, I see no proof that critics disagreed about the value of their work that time.
B is correct because we can call works obectively great if they continued to delight audiences for centuries.
Contemporaries could not delight audiences for centuries, therefore, can not be obectively great.
Paul, can you please point to the place saying that works of Mich, Bach and Shak were subjective? These works are objectively great!
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4441
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
81
[0], given: 0
|
The example given with Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art immediately follow: "But over time the subjective element disappears". I infered from that that those examples were originally subjective
_________________
Best Regards,
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 38
Location: Dallas Texas
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
The OA is B- The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
You guys are awesome thanks for the in-depth surgery!
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4441
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
81
[0], given: 0
|
Hats off to you Serge, I did see your point after you asked me that question but I stubbornly tried to defend my irrational point 
_________________
Best Regards,
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 602
Location: San Jose, CA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 0
|
Oh! finally I got the point.
Thanks guys for detailed explnations!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similar topics |
Author |
Replies |
Last post |
|
Similar
Topics:
|
 |
|
|
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and
|
damit |
11 |
13 Jun 2005, 21:20 |
 |
|
|
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and
|
nakib77 |
6 |
12 Oct 2005, 13:49 |
|
|
|
|
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and
|
sperinko |
12 |
06 Aug 2006, 08:47 |
|
|
|
|
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and
|
MBA2ran |
11 |
05 Dec 2006, 22:29 |
|
|
|
|
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and
|
prasun84 |
14 |
14 Nov 2008, 05:36 |
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
